Re: Publishers and ebooks

From: James Weinheimer <weinheimer.jim.l_at_nyob>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 21:10:43 +0200
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
On 05/10/2011 07:43 PM, Cindy Harper wrote:
<snip>
> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 1:05 PM, john g marr wrote:

> Crowds using Critical Thinking (+ study of "Fallacy" and "Cognitive Bias")
> as a selection tool would be incredibly immune to manipulation.
I know I've been told that "authority is dead", but I think it's a 
legitimate research question whether crowds limited to "academic" 
members would differ in book/page rankings from unlimited crowds. How do 
you ensure the crowd is using Critical Thinking?
</snip>

This is a the main point. *IF* everybody thought "correctly" (whatever 
that means) a lot of problems would simply disappear in our world. But 
there is no chance for everyone to be trained to think in specific ways, 
and I don't know how popular this would be anyway. In fact, I don't even 
know if *I* like that idea so much. Certainly, bibliographic instruction 
and information literacy have not been that great of successes.

I still believe that the point brought up by Mr. Line that "that the 
term user education is, "meaningless, inaccurate, pretentious and 
patronising and that if only librarians would spend the time and effort 
to ensure that their libraries are more user friendly then they wouldn't 
have to spend so much time doing user education" holds some deep wisdom 
(as I discussed at more length in one of my 
podcasts)http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/2010/11/cataloging-matters-no.html

But returning to selection, I do believe that many people want materials 
selected for them by experts. They don't have the time to weigh and 
consider and research everything they read. That's what a lot of school 
and university is all about: you pay experts to make a selection of the 
"best" information and methods and they relate that information to you. 
Admittedly, this task is quite different from traditional library 
selection and would have to change in some fundamental ways since one 
difference would be to include many more "expert selectors" (however 
that would be defined) but certainly you would have to include 
recognized experts and scholars in the field.

Obviously, many details would have to be filled in, but I am convinced 
that something really useful could emerge and if that happened, the 
public would appreciate it and come to use the tools we make. Somehow 
and in some way, libraries need to make a splash!

-- 
James L. Weinheimer  weinheimer.jim.l_at_gmail.com
First Thus: http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/
Cooperative Cataloging Rules: http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/
Received on Tue May 10 2011 - 15:11:06 EDT